11/13/2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mayra Mejia (Latino Health Access) requested that the Planning Commission move consideration of the item to January 28, 2013. Apolonio Cortes (SACReD), with Spanish translation by Mayra Mejia, indicated he would like more time to understand the proposed ordinance. Jeannette Rubio, resident, requested that the Planning Commission move consideration of the item to January 28, 2013. ' Darren Shippen, resident, requested that the Planning Commission move consideration of the item to January 28, 2013. Dave Hoen, resident, expressed his support of the proposed changes and requested that the Planning Commission move consideration of the item to January 28, 2013. Voiced concern that the proposed regulation to limit the age of patrons to 21-and- over after 10 p.m., for those businesses with either a Category III or IV Entertainment Permit may limit some businesses' ability to offer certain events. He also voiced concern that the proposed cost recovery fee for police services being based on calls for service would deter people from calling the police. Commissioner Nalle requested clarification on why staff chose 10,000 square feet as the threshold for the separation requirement for off-sale establishments. Planning Manager Haluza clarified that the number had been chosen because it most closely reflected the average footprint of mid-size stores, such as CVS or Fresh n Easy, but still allowed for the necessary regulations for smaller stores. Chairman Alderete inquired as to why the Entertainment Permit was proposed as a ministerial permit and asked how the community would be notified or otherwise have their concerns considered given that it would be issued by the Police Department. ' Commander Ken Gominsky described the results of his research regarding the ways that other jurisdictions have handled similar permits, specifically citing the example of the City of Anaheim. Commander Gominsky stressed that the Planning Commission would have discretion over the issuance of the alcohol permit, which is the component that is most typically of concern to the community. The Entertainment Permit would be ancillary to the liquor license. Planning Manager Haluza stated that the public would have the ability to have their concerns addressed much more directly should any problems arise with regards to any Entertainment Permits due to the fact that the permit could more easily be revoked or modified based on complaints, in contrast to a Conditional Use Permit which would require a lengthy revocation process and, potentially, years of documentation of violations. Chairman Alderete also requested clarification on how the cost recovery fee would be administered. Commander Gominsky stated that a baseline of calls for service would be established during the first year of operation under the Entertainment Permit and that subsequent increases for service over the baseline would be reviewed for possible cost recovery. Commissioner Nalle stated that the proposed changes were a vast improvement over current practice and asked Executive Director Trevino for clarification on the proposed adoption timeline. Mr. Trevino stated that, while the decision was up to the Planning Commission, the Commission had expressed concern over inconsistent policies and that delays in the schedule would continue to result in uncertainty for current applicants. He stated that the ordinance would be ready for presentation to Planning Commission on November 26 and that the Commission would have the discretion to further consider the adoption schedule at that time. The Commissioners agreed. F. Recess to City Council Chamber (6:47 p.m.) Planning Commission Minutes 3 November 13, 2012